Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
FACTS 4. Control and supervision was exercised by Tangco in his capacity as CITY ENGR
1. Guilatco was a court interpreter of CFI-Dagupan. On July 5 1978, while she was about and not as the ex-officio Highway Engr.
to board a tricycle at a sidewalk at Perez Blvd. (national road under the control and
supervision of the City), Guilatco fell into a manhole. She suffered from a fractured right leg Court said that his salary as City Engr. (P1,810) substantially exceeds his honorarium as
and endured excruciating pain even after she was discharged. She was hospitalized, ex-officio Highway Engr. (P200).
operated on, and confined at the Pangasinan Provincial Hospital for 16 days. Guilatco
wasn’t able to report for work as she had difficulty of locomotion in going up and down the
stairs of her office. The function of supervision over streets pertaining to the City Engr. is coursed through a
Maintenance Foreman and a Maintenance Engr. Although these last two officials are
2. The City of Dagupan & City Engineer Alfred Tangco’s defense was that Perez Blvd. is a employees of the National Gov't, they are detailed with the City of Dagupan and hence
national road. Although maintained by Tangco, the City claims that Tangco was, receive instruction and supervision from the city through the City Engr.
concurrent to his position as City Engr., also the ex-officio Highway Engr. of the Bureau of
Public Highways, therefore, Perez Blvd. is not under the City’s control and supervision.
DIGESTER: GDR
3. CFI – in favor of Guilatco. CA - reversed, no evidence of control and supervision.
ISSUE
WON control and supervision exists - YES, therefore the City is liable for damages.
RATIO
Art 2189 NCC: Provinces, cities and municipalities shall be liable for damages for the
death of, or injuries suffered by, any person by reason of the defective condition of roads,
streets, bridges, public buildings, and other public works under their control or supervision.
2. Ownership irrelevant
The provision does not require the road to belong to the City, what is required is for said
road to be under the control or supervision of said municipality.